Suchergebnisse

In the discussion of the EU as an international actor, one of the important aspects is foreign policy coherence. One of the instruments of foreign policy is public diplomacy which in the network society is often embodied in the form of digital diplomacy – use of information technologies for achieving diplomatic goals through reaching the networks of information consumers in the Internet.The significance of digital diplomacy for the EU was outlined by numerous politicians and researchers and has actualized after the events in Ukraine when the refusal of the government to sign the Association Agreement led to the wave of escalating protests, overthrow of the President, a deep political crisis and territorial losses (annexation of the Crimea by Russia). The EU digital diplomacy has been actively embodied in this process, but sometimes it appeared to be not an example of a concerted action.The aim of this article is to verify the horizontal coherence of the EU social media diplomacy in the case of the EU–Ukraine relations. The results allow us to conclude that, despite some minor failures (some unsuited rhetoric, lack of references to each other and of interactivity), on the horizontal level the EU is mostly coherent in maintaining its digital diplomacy, which allows to speak about its succeeding in self-presentation as an international actor in the Internet communication.

Globalization is the defining historical process of our times, conditioning, if not determining, outcomes across vast swathes of human activity. At the same time, a heteropolar world is emerging, one in which various and competing sources of power and influence are based more on difference than on similarity. In the face of these transformative forces, diplomacy is struggling to evolve. To date, none of the key elements of the diplomatic ecosystem – the foreign ministry, the Foreign Service, or the diplomatic business model – have adapted well, or quickly enough. If diplomacy is to achieve its full potential as a non-violent approach to the management of international relations and global issues through political communications, then radical reform will be required. These observations are particularly apt in Canada, where diplomatic performance has in recent years been troubled. The foreign ministry (formerly DFAIT), still struggling to absorb the deep cuts contained in the federal budget of March 2012, finds itself in the midst of a complicated merger with the aid agency (formerly CIDA). This unanticipated amalgamation has resulted in significant uncertainty and dislocation in both organizations, and is reminiscent of the disastrous split, and then re-integration, of the foreign and trade ministries 2004-06. Canadian public and digital diplomacy, widely considered to represent the leading edge of diplomatic practice, have been wound down as a result of the imposition of centralized control over all communications. The Foreign Service, for its part, remains locked in a protracted and acrimonious labour dispute over pay equity. Rotating strikes and working to rule have taken a toll on business and tourist arrivals, foreign student enrolment and high-level visits. In short, Canada's diplomatic ecosystem is in a perilous state, and Canadian interests are suffering.In the age of globalization and heteropolarity, this won't do.

Before the news out of the Middle East turned almost universally distressing, many Westerners were wide-eyed over what some called the Arab Spring and others, the Arab Awakening. Technologists, especially those in and around Silicon Valley, were quick to attribute the Middle Eastern uprisings that began in 2010 to a combination of social media and mobile phones. Tech-oriented socio-economist Clay Shirky wrote of digital technology having created in the Middle East a networked population that, thanks to the Internet, enjoyed more opportunities to engage in public speech and undertake collective action. The popular movements in Tunisia and Egypt were blithely dubbed the 'Twitter Revolution' by Western journalists -- though not by Shirky. While many now take for granted that the Internet can create instant revolution via inherently democratic, open, and decentralized leadership, Shirky explains that Internet-enabled networking can help loosely coordinated publics demand change, but does not cause revolution on its own. Adapted from the source document.

Статья рассматривает проекты публичной дипломатии Германии, Ирана, США и России в сети Интернет. Данный вид публичной дипломатии получил обозначение «цифровая дипломатия» во внешнеполитическом дискурсе изучаемых стран. Сегодня эти государства являются лидерами в сфере распространения информации в социальных сетях. Анализ информационной деятельности Германии, Ирана, США и России в сети Интернет показывает, что содержание распространяемой информации имеет пропагандисткий и политизированный характер в отличие от традиционных программ публичной дипломатии в виде культурных, образовательных или спортивных обменов. ; The article reviews digital diplomacy of the United States, Russia, Germany, and Iran in social networks. These countries turned out to be the leaders in the field of digital diplomacy. The study concludes that all these countries exploit the Internet to pursue their national interests and political goals. Moreover, digital diplomacy is more politically motivated than traditional public diplomacy in terms of cultural, educational, and sport exchanges.

Governments set rules; businesses operate by following these rules. This idealized notion of political economy is more inaccurate today than ever before. Business leaders, including technology entrepreneurs, must participate in rulemaking due to deregulation and liberalization, prominent global risks (such as climate change and migration) that do not respect national borders, and digital technology that is spewing new issues requiring new rules. Business leaders are expected to be corporate diplomats. Corporate diplomacy is not about turning businessmen into part-time politicians or statesmen. Rather, it involves corporations taking part in creating, enforcing, and changing the rules of the game that govern the conduct of business. It goes well beyond delegating external communications and lobbying to a public relations agency or a law firm. Precise understanding of corporate diplomacy would help businesses compete more effectively in the global economy. This column clarifies corporate diplomacy, its benefits and challenges.

Ideas fuel power, giving means, understanding and arguments to the public sphere. Think tanks are the most influential actors in creating and disseminating such ideas in the field of international relations. This article analyses the networks of relations among think tanks in order better to understand their nature and the ways in which they operate in a global reality, organized by geographical areas. The research method is by structural analysis, using raw data collected on Twitter. Most of the think tanks selected are those categorized by the gotothinktank.com study. The main conclusions are that English is the predominant language, that geography still matters in influencing ideas and that us-based think tanks lead the social media conversation.

Статья посвящена цифровой дипломатии, являющейся составной частью публичной дипломатии. Анализируется использование возможностей информационно-коммуникационных технологий для решения задач по продвижению внешнеполитических интересов США и влиянию на массовое сознание посредством интернета, социальных сетей и блогов. ; The article is devoted to the digital diplomacy which is a component of public diplomacy. The use of opportunities of information and communication technologies for solving the problems of the promotion of the USA foreign policy interests and influence on mass consciousness by means of the Internet, social networks and blogs is analyzed.

Digital communication technologies have thrust the calculus of global political power into a period of unprecedented complexity. In every aspect of international affairs, digitally enabled actors are changing the way the world works, and disrupting the institutions that once held a monopoly on power. In this book, Taylor Owen provides a look at the way that digital technologies are shaking up the workings of the institutions that have traditionally controlled international affairs: humanitarianism, diplomacy, war, journalism, activism, and finance

This essay outlines a so-called paradigm shift that is occurring in regard to diplomacy and global politics in general. This is a paradigm shift away from the nation-state towards both non-state actors and individuals, and towards regional and global movements and organizations. In terms of diplomacy, this is seen as moving away from the images of old men in striped pants at formal summits to social movements uniting through social media, sometimes called "citizen diplomacy" or "digital diplomacy". This inaugural issue, with contributions from AGS students and faculty, will explore and problematize many of these issues. To put the issues in context, I will give an overview of the perceived contrast between what I term "old" and "new diplomacy."